linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] parport: register driver later

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20160405052608.GA2625@sudip-tp>
Date:	Tue, 5 Apr 2016 06:26:08 +0100
From:	Sudip Mukherjee <sudipm.mukherjee@...il.com>
To:	gregkh@...uxfoundation.org,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, stable@...r.kernel.org,
	Ross Zwisler <ross.zwisler@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] parport: register driver later

On Mon, Mar 07, 2016 at 10:32:55AM -0700, Ross Zwisler wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 06, 2016 at 08:40:10PM +0530, Sudip Mukherjee wrote:
> > If the parport bus is not yet registered and any device using parallel
> > port tries to register with the bus we get a stackdump with a message
> > of Kernel bug.
> > 
> > Reported-by: Fengguang Wu <fengguang.wu@...el.com>
> > Cc: <stable@...r.kernel.org> # 4.2+
> > Signed-off-by: Sudip Mukherjee <sudip.mukherjee@...ethink.co.uk>
> > ---
> > 
> > Hi Ross,
> > Can you please test this patch in your setup. This is a respin of the
> > previous patch in another way.
> 
> Yep, this also solves the issue for me.
> 
> Tested-by: Ross Zwisler <ross.zwisler@...ux.intel.com>

Hi Greg,
If this patch is ok, can we please have it in v4.6 .
Anyway, the problem patch which this patch tried to fix has already
been reverted by Linus - 
1701f680407c ("Revert "ppdev: use new parport device model"") but we still
can have problem with the other devices that use parport.

BTW, I know you are busy, but in these situations where I need to have
the fix urgently in the tree, is there any other way to solve the purpose?
I feel it was incompetency on my part where Linus had to interfere and
revert a patch even though the fix was already posted.

regards
sudip